Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two of the most significant changes in the field of infectious disease management during the last few decades are the emergence of atypical and/or new pathogens that may have devastating consequences and the re-emergence of well-recognised organisms that have acquired antimicrobial resistance through a variety of mechanisms. Erythromycin, the prototype macrolide, was originally marketed approximately five decades ago as a useful alternative agent in the treatment of patients allergic to beta-lactam antibiotics. While clinically useful, its pharmacokinetic and adverse-event profile limited the use of erythromycin to these individuals. Enhancements of the macrolide structure circumvented many of the limitations of erythromycin and resulted in the development of azithromycin and clarithromycin. The clinical uses of clarithromycin and azithromycin are substantially wider than erythromycin due to the wide spectra of activity against the atypical and newer pathogens. In addition, these agents are well-tolerated and have a pharmacokinetic profile that allows once- or twice-daily administration. Studies also indicate that the more common of the two mechanisms of macrolide resistance in the US and Canada imparts only low-level resistance. The multitude of studies substantiating clinical as well as bacteriological success with these two agents indicates that, when used appropriately, they will stand the test of time and continue to be useful antimicrobial agents.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".